Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45981 (AP)

MEKALA SUBBA RAYUDU v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/21546/2025 · 2025-12-02

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010410692025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21546/2025 Between: 1. MEKALA SUBBA RAYUDU, S/O. MEKALA BALA SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 5/46, SARADHI STUDIO STREET, PRODDUTUR ROAD, MYDHUKUR, KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. MEKALA SURESH,, S/O. MEKALA SUBBA RAYUDU AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 5/46, SARADHI STUDIO STREET, PRODDUTUR ROAD, MYDHUKUR, KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DGP OFFICE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA, KADAPA DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MYDUKUR POLICE STATION, KADAPA DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. DHEERA KANISHKA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent/s in opening, maintaining and continuing of Rowdy 2 Sheet.No.267 and 265 against the Petitioners as arbitrary, illegal, malafide and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the Respondents herein to close the Rowdy Sheet No.267 and 265, against the Petitioners and further direct the respondents not to interfere with the personal liberty of the Petitioner.= 2. Sri Dheera Kanishka, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that except one crime, no other cases are pending against the Petitioners. Hence, prayed to direct the Respondents – Police to close the rowdy sheets opened against the Petitioners. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, by way of counter affidavit, would submit that, except one case in Crime No.97 of 2023 of Mydukur U/G Police Station, registered for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 448, 427, 324, 307 and 153-A read with 149 IPC, wherein charge sheet is filed and numbered as S.C.No.380 of 2018, there are no other cases pending against the Petitioners. 4. In Sunkara Satyanarayana Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh1 a Coordinate Bench of this Court held as follows: <It is clear that rowdy sheets cannot be opened against any individual in a casual and mechanical manner. Dubbing a person as an habitual offender and to open a rowdy sheet is not sufficient. On the other hand, due care and caution shall be taken by the Police before characterising a person as a rowdy. The important element that has to be seen in the acts of an offender is whether the acts so committed by a person will have a tendency to disturb public peace and tranquility=. 5. A perusal of the aforesaid judgment goes to show that, rowdy sheet cannot be opened mechanically and not in a casual manner. In opening a 1 2000(1) ALD (Crl.) 117 (AP) 3 rowdy sheet it is essential that, due care has to be taken by the Respondent Police and, every year the committee has to review whether the rowdy sheet has to be continued or not. The other aspect that has to be seen by the Respondent Police is whether the crimes which are registered against the Accused would come within the purview of disturbing the public peace and tranquility at large. In the case on hand, admittedly, as admitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, except one case, no other cases are pending against the Petitioners. In such circumstances, continuation of the impugned rowdy sheet against the Petitioners herein would amount to abuse of process of the Court. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned rowdy sheet opened against the Petitioners is hereby set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:03.12.2025 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.21546 of 2025 Dt.03.12.2025 Dinesh